Changes

In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref> C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4642(193802)4%3A1%3C14%3ATWATNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A in JSTOR]</ref> In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. He discounted third party links to Progressivism and argued that Populists were provincial, conspiracy-minded, and had a tendency toward scapegoatism that manifested itself as nativism, anti-Semitism, anti-intellectualism, and Anglophobia. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing Progressivism in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]], [[George Norris]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955</ref>  

In the 1930s [[C. Vann Woodward]] stressed the southern base, seeing the possibility of a black-and-white coalition of poor against the overbearing rich. Georgia politician Tom Watson served as Woodward's hero.<ref> C. Vann Woodward, '' Tom Watson: Agrarian Rebel'' (1938); Woodward, "Tom Watson and the Negro in Agrarian Politics," ''The Journal of Southern History,'' Vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb., 1938), pp. 14-33 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4642(193802)4%3A1%3C14%3ATWATNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A in JSTOR]</ref> In the 1950s, however, scholars such as [[Richard Hofstadter]] portrayed the Populist movement as an irrational response of backward-looking farmers to the challenges of modernity. He discounted third party links to Progressivism and argued that Populists were provincial, conspiracy-minded, and had a tendency toward scapegoatism that manifested itself as nativism, anti-Semitism, anti-intellectualism, and Anglophobia. The antithesis of anti-modern Populism was modernizing Progressivism in this model, with such leading progressives as [[Theodore Roosevelt]], [[Robert LaFollette]], [[George Norris]] and [[Woodrow Wilson]] had been vehement enemies of Populism, though [[William Jennings Bryan]] did cooperate with them and accepted the Populist nomination in 1896.<ref>Richard Hofstadter, '' The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F.D.R.'' (1955</ref>  

Michael Kazin's ''The Populist Persuasion'' (1995) argued that Populism reflected a rhetorical style that manifested itself in spokesmen like Father Charles Coughlin in the 1930s and Governor George Wallace in the 1960s.  

Michael Kazin's ''The Populist Persuasion'' (1995) argued that Populism reflected a rhetorical style that manifested itself in spokesmen like Father [[Charles Coughlin]] in the 1930s and Governor [[George Wallace]] in the 1960s.  

Postel (2007) rejects the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref> Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007) </ref>

Postel (2007) rejects the notion that the Populists were traditionalistic and anti-modern. Quite the reverse, he argued, the Populists aggressively sought self-consciously progressive goals. They sought diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge, formed highly centralized organizations, launched large-scale incorporated businesses, and pressed for an array of state-centered reforms. Hundreds of thousands of women committed to Populism seeking a more modern life, education, and employment in schools and offices. A large section of the labor movement looked to Populism for answers, forging a political coalition with farmers that gave impetus to the regulatory state. Progress, however, was also menacing and inhumane, Postel notes. White Populists, embraced social-Darwinist notions of racial improvement, Chinese exclusion and the humiliation and brutality of separate-but-equal.<ref> Charles Postel, ''The Populist Vision'' (2007) </ref>

[[Category:United States Political Parties]]

[[Category:United States Political Parties]]